A group of growers with many years of industry experience in producing taro decided to investigate a taro chip manufacturing plant to enable taro growers to achieve more stable incomes by providing an alternative outlet for their crop and to create jobs in a region that suffers from high unemployment.

The growers saw the chips as having a very attractive appearance and a distinctive natural taste, texture and colour, and that these characteristics would enable the development of a product with strong market appeal. Taro chips have not been produced in commercial quantities in Australia at present and currently are mainly home-cooked for family and friends.

Objectives
The objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility of establishing a taro chip processing industry in North Queensland. Elements in the study included:
 

• Developing a taro chip product.
• Undertaking a sensory evaluation of that product.
• Determining market characteristics and identifying potential markets for the product.
• Undertaking an economic feasibility assessment of the taro chips.

Methodology
Research for this taro chip project was broken down into four separate areas. These were market assessment, business assessment, determining processing and technical requirements, and sensory evaluation. This report presents the findings of the research in those areas and summaries for each follow.

Marketing assessment
The average Australian spends around $30 per person each year on salty snacks. The salty snack grocery category in Australia is growing at 5 to 7 per cent per annum by value. Two companies, Smiths Snack Food Company and Arnott’s Snack Foods, dominate the Australian salty snack market.

Between them they account for more than 80 per cent of this market. Salty snack products are pitched towards four consumer segments - health conscious, convenience, kids and premium/indulgence.

Interviews with a number of distributors and retailers suggested that the proposed taro chip would be best pitched toward the premium indulgence segment of the salty snack market. This segment of the market is growing and would best suit the proposed product’s distinctive appearance. Likely competitors in this segment include Kettle Sweet Potato Chips, Red Rock Deli Chips, Pringles and Ajitas Vege Chips.

Two focus group assessments provided favourable comment on the palatability of the taro chips.

However price was often cited as being the most significant factor to limit purchase.

In Hawaii taro chips are produced predominantly for the tourism market, a market similar to premium indulgence segment identified for North Queensland. Growth in this market has been static in recent years, with an inability to secure regular volumes of supply and a downturn in the tourism market cited as the major factors.

Distribution and supply chain partnering in the Australian retail market pose a number of challenges for the proposed taro chip. Given the envisaged limited scale of the North Queensland taro chip operation, approaching either of the two major supermarket chains directly was not recommended.

Distribution through the IGA and convenience stores (C-Stores) in North and Far North Queensland would provide the most manageable solution.

Business assessment
A spreadsheet was prepared to enable the growers to undertake a whole budget analysis for the processing factory. Growers then entered their estimates of processing, marketing and distribution costs. The analyses indicated that, given grower requirements of $2.50/kg for the raw product supplied to the factory, a taro chip processing business would not be profitable.

Processing/technical requirements
Taro corms were harvested in the Babinda/Innisfail area of Far North Queensland and transported by road at ambient temperature to Brisbane arriving approximately five days after harvest. The taro corms were nine months old at the time of harvest. Upon arrival in Brisbane, the cartons of taro were stored at 10°C until processing.

Taro corms were peeled by hand using a domestic potato peeler and then sliced using a ham/meat slicer. Due to the large size of the corms, most slices were cut into quarters using a domestic kitchen knife. After slicing, the raw taro slices were fried, and then drained for 10 seconds before being added to a tumbler for salt to be added. Numerous trials were conducted to determine the optimal slice thickness, oil temperature and frying time. A slice thickness of between 1.5-1.75mm, cooked for 60 seconds at 180-185°C with 7% salt addition (based on final chip weight), produced chips with the most uniform colour and texture. It is essential to stir the taro chips during the initial 20 seconds of frying to prevent the chips sticking together. Three different frying oils were trialed for manufacturing taro chips, with cottonseed oil being the most suitable in terms of colour, texture and flavour.

Trials were conducted to determine the quality of chips produced with 12-month-old taro corms.

Taro chips produced using the method for the nine-month-old taro were brown and undesirable.

Several pre-treatments of the raw taro slices were investigated, with water blanching of the taro slices at 90°C for 3-5 minutes being the most effective treatment. The effect the age of the taro has on the acceptability of the finished chip shows that nine-month-old taro produces a superior quality chip without the need for any pre-treatment stage.

During the course of the trial work, it became apparent that chips produced from the top of the taro corm were a darker colour than chips produced from the middle of the corm. This did not, however, necessarily mean that all of the chips from the top of the corms were unacceptable. Analysis of the corms showed that the top of the corm tends to have a higher moisture content than the middle of the corm (an average of 4.4% higher from all results), a higher reducing sugar content than the middle of the corm (an average of 0.15% higher) and a lower starch content than the middle of the corm (an average of 5.6% lower).

The effect of different storage conditions of the taro corms on the final chip quality was investigated.

Taro corms were stored at 4°C and 10°C over a period of two weeks, with chips being produced initially, after one week’s storage and after two weeks’ storage. The results of this storage trial showed that taro corms can be stored for one week at either 4°C or 10°C without any substantial loss in taro chip quality. Storage for two weeks resulted in undesirable browning in some of the chips produced from these batches. The analytical results showed there was less change in the key parameters of the taro stored at 10°C than occurred in the taro stored at 4°C.

Trials were conducted to identify which type of taro corm produced an inferior chip. It was anticipated this information could be used to screen taro corms suitable for chip processing.

However, all of the taro corms from four separate shipments supplied for this trial and identified by the grower as being inferior or damaged in some way produced acceptable taro chips.

Moisture contents varied from 57.8%-74.9%, total sugar contents .3%-1.1%, reducing sugar contents 0.2-0.6% and starch content 5%-25.9%. Therefore, it was not possible from these trials to identify any particular parameter of the taro corm that would produce sub-quality taro chips.

However, the quality of the chips produced for the consumer acceptance testing was sub-optimal.

The appearance of the chips was browner than was considered desirable and the chips also appeared oily. A review of analytical results from previous batches of taro showed the reducing sugar content of this taro was quite high compared with many previous samples.

Yield calculations were conducted while producing taro chips for the storage trial. When conducted under the conditions described in this report, an average yield of 29.5% was recorded.

A storage trial of the taro chips was conducted. The trial investigated the shelf life of the chips when stored in 50 g, 100 g and 200 g packaging and stored at the temperatures of 20°C and 30°C. It determined if modifying the atmosphere in the chip packaging produced any discernible quality differences in the chips over the course of the storage trial.

Sensory evaluation
Consumers from Brisbane were recruited to assess four samples of taro chips. The 72 people chosen were at least 18 years old and had eaten at least one variety of premium indulgence chips (Kettle Chips, Red Rock Deli Chips, Pringles or Ajitas Vege Chips) in the past six months.

No significant differences (P>0.05) were found between the four samples of taro chips in terms of appearance, odour, flavour, texture or overall acceptability. For all of these characteristics the scores ranged from 52 to 61, which was just above the neither like nor dislike region of the scale. The scores relating to the size and crunchiness of the taro chips suggest the consumers thought all the taro chips sampled were slightly on the small size and were not quite crunchy enough. However, in terms of saltiness and thickness, the mean sensory scores for the sample that was 1.5 to 1.75 mm thick with 7% salt was closer to ‘just right’ than the other three samples.

Conclusion
Due to the high cost of raw material (taro), it was determined that the commercialisation of the proposed taro chip product should not proceed at this point in time. However positive results from focus group discussions and consumer acceptance panels suggest there is a small market for a premium/exotic salty snack product in the domestic market.

Further investigations into manufacturing chips from other less expensive root crops could be undertaken. If mechanisation can reduce the farm-gate price of processing taro to below $1.50/kg, commercialisation of the product could be reconsidered.

During the course of the trial work, there were indications that reducing sugar contents of 0.9% and higher would produce a chip with undesirable browning. However, this requires substantiation and, should it be confirmed, it is recommended that a ‘rapid on farm’ test be developed to screen taro corms suitable for further chip production.

Site map Contact us Feedback Links Disclaimer Privacy Statement

Last updated: September 2005
Copyright RIRDC
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/reports/AFO/05-144sum.html